Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

the Hebrew text, and that the onus innovandi (if I may be allowed the expression) rests with the compilers of our own excellent Liturgy. No doubt, they had good grounds for what they did, and I should be much obliged to any of your correspondents who would take the trouble to give me some information on the subject, or refer me to any book where I might obtain it. I remain, Sir,

Your humble servant,

W. C.*

NOTICES AND REVIEWS.

Conversion, in a Series of all the Cases recorded in the New Testament, &c. &c. By the Rev. J. K. Craig, Incumbent of Oulton-cum-Wood. London: Hamilton, Adams, and Co. 1833. 2 vols. 12mo.

MR. CRAIG'S work will not please either of the two great parties in the church, differing, as it does, in doctrine from the one, and speaking with great severity of much in the other, and yet no serious man of either party could read it without advantage; for, while he differed from very much, he would find a great deal of straight-forward, practical, home admonition and instruction which he might turn to much advantage. They who do not agree with Mr.

The controversy to which W. C. alludes is of very ancient date. If he will consult Augustin. Quæstiones in Exod. (Qu. 71) he will find that the first table was even then divided differently,-by some into three precepts, by others into four. St. Augustin prefers the first division (partly because the number three alludes to the Trinity), and this division has usually prevailed in the Romish church; and in the Roman catechism (Catechismus ad Parochos) it is insisted on chiefly because "it has become common in the church." The Lutherans retained it; but the reformed churches of Germany adopted the same as the English church, as W. C. may find in Walchius Bibliotheca Theologica, vol. ii. p. 464.

With regard to the division of the Hebrew text, if W. C. will consult the Dissertation of J. Buxtorf, "De Decalogo," (it occurs in the first edition of his Dissertationes Philologico-Theologicæ, Bas. 1645, but is omitted in that of 1662, because he intended to enlarge it), he will find that no conclusion can be drawn from the letters D and D. As some readers may not know the use of these letters in the Pentateuch, it may be mentioned that they merely refer to the space to be left between two smaller sections of the law, in writing a MS., and to the part of the line at which such section is to begin. The signifies an open section (), and the a close one (nd). See Buxtorf, de Abbreviationibus, in voc. DD. Maimonides enumerates all these sections in his Yad Hachazakah (vol. i. p. 96), but he makes no division in the tenth commandment, nor do all the Hebrew Bibles; in fact many do not, e. g. that of Buxtorf, and that of Venice, &c., and Kennicott has a list of nearly half a column long of MSS. in which no space is found there.

Aben Ezra makes the Preface to the Commandments one of the ten words, but numbers only nine commandments; and assigns as a reason, that there are nine celestial orbs! W. C. will find a great deal on the subject in the Critici Sacri on Exod. xx. It is curious that the Catechismus ad Parochos recites all the commandments at full length, before their explanation, except the first, where it stops at sculptile, and puts an &c. (Ed. Lyons, 1676); but it recites the remainder of the commandment in the article "De Cultu et Invocatione Sanctorum," annexed to the explanation of this precept. The Roman Catholic writers refer the promises and threats at the end of our second commandment to all the commandments, as the margin of the Douay Bible remarks.

C.'s views as to Conversion may, in particular, read his sermons on the defective conversions in the New Testament (substituting belief for conversion) and derive very valuable instruction from them. But what could induce Mr. Craig, who can write good plain English, to write his introduction in so thoroughly absurd a dialect? When he talks of pastoral vigilance being susurrously thwarted, and uses fifty other phrases as preposterous, does he wish to deter people from going beyond his Introduction? Again, what can induce Mr. Craig, in order to shew that man is prone to be led by the pride of life, and the lust of the flesh and of the eye, to refer to Cain's departing into the land of Nod, and calling a city after his son's name, and to Jubal and Tubal's inventions, as the first examples of these sins. Cain had departed from the Lord, by murdering his brother, long before; by God's sentence, he was obliged to leave his presence; and they who will look into their own hearts need not arraign Jubal and Tubal for inventions, for which the Bible does not arraign them, which in their essence are not sinful, but may conduce to the good of man and the glory of God. Nothing can more effectually tend to prejudice men against Scripture than this forcing it beyond what it will bear, which is a very common practice in the present day.*

Travels of an Irish Gentleman in search of a Religion. By the Editor of Captain Rock's Memoirs." London: Longman and Co. 1833. 2 vols.

[ocr errors]

12mo.

A MORE amusing affair than this has not appeared for an age-Mr. Thomas Little actually metamorphosed into a controversial divine! He recently appeared in the amiable guise of the writer of a ludicrous poem on a truly comic occasion-the distress, starvation, and murder of the Irish clergy, and now steps forth to all appearance a most redoubtable champion of the Roman church. But, alas! there is a certain fable in Esop which will rise to the minds of all Mr. Little's readers. They will not, indeed, accuse the Daw of having got a Peacock's feathers, but of having drest himself in some worthless finery not his own.

The volume of which Mr. Little professes, by order of his priests, to be the author, is a mixture of passages from the fathers, misquoted, mistranslated, and, in most cases, given very wisely without reference, which, of course, clearly establish the absurdity of Protestantism, and the usual elegant and refined Romish jokes about Luther's being a drunkard, and all protestant parsons being fat, &c. &c. The elegantiæ and facetiæ of this volume, the biting wit of pointing out that all protestant rectors are fat, &c. &c., are, very probably, drest up by Mr. Thomas Little himself, (though marvellously ill,) but he may safely be acquitted of the learning, such as it is. If the real author will come from behind the masque of Mr. Little, the book and the subject shall be fully discussed, probably to his heart's content. But it would really be too absurd to see a controversy on the meaning of passages in Epiphanius and Augustine, and the great questions between the Romanists and Protestants, held with the author of the "Twopenny post-bag" and " Mr. Thomas Little's Poems." In the meantime, it may be said, that there is not a single passage here quoted (i. e. among those which are fairly quoted and fairly translated) which has not been noticed by Protestant writers an hundred times, nor a single low joke of Mr. Little's which has not been used till it is threadbare by Papists of the same good feelings and taste as himself. The only mischief is, that, in this sort of warfare, the Romanists were so decidedly beaten that they entirely desisted from it for a long period, and now rather ingeniously take it up again under the idea (not

Mr. Craig may, no doubt, defend himself by reference to many and learned divines; and no doubt one would not look among Cain's race for instances of obedience to God; but where Scripture is silent we had better be silent too.

wholly a mistaken one) that ordinary Protestants are not prepared with answers to arguments so long given up, as not to be thought or spoken of. But the sword is only a little rusty, and will soon come forth in all its ancient strength, to cut down the army of false quotations, false translations, and citations of spurious passages which are mixt up in the Irish Gentleman's Travels.

Discourses delivered in the Parish Church of All Saints, Poplar. By Samuel Hoole, A.M., Rector. London: Rivingtons. 1833. 8vo, pp. 318. MR. HOOLE writes with clearness, strength, point, and earnestness. The sermons on the Penitent Thief and the Ten Virgins (on deferring repentance) could not but be profitable to the hearers. Mr. Keble has said most truly, and with singular happiness of expression, that the question of the validity of a death-bed repentance is best left in the merciful obscurity in which Scripture sets it. But the warning against relying on that future repentance cannot be given too strongly to those who have yet time. The chief objection to Mr. Hoole's sermons is a certain asperity with which he speaks of all who differ from what he approves in opinion or in conduct.

Sermons chiefly delivered, or prepared for delivery, at the Chapel Royal, St. James's. By the Rev. W. Strong, A.M., one of his Majesty's Chaplains in Ordinary. Cambridge: Deightons; and London: Rivingtons. 1833. 8vo, Pp. 363.

THESE Sermons are of somewhat a more learned cast than is common in these days. Their sound views and principles will be a sufficient recommendation of them.

1833.

Seven Sermons on the Lord's Supper, with appropriate Devotions for Family Use. By the Rev. C. Girdlestone, &c. London: Rivingtons. Affection between the Church and the Dissenters; a Sermon, preached before the University of Oxford. By the Rev. C. Girdlestone. Oxford: Parker. 1833. MR. GIRDLESTONE'S Sermons are always so earnest and full of valuable practical instruction that they cannot be read without advantage. The present volume forms no exception to this remark, although, to the writer, it does not appear that the sermons which it contains, though valuable, are quite as impressive as some in Mr. G.'s former publications. The preface is somewhat curious. Mr. G. says that he should have had more readers if he had printed his Sermons as essays, but he has not done so because that would be somewhat of a fraud (!) and would shew that he preferred being the author of a book to preaching and printing sermons. Printing sermons is so very much like being author of a book that this reason does not appear to have much weight. One may say too, without derogating from sermons either preached or printed, that there are books of which one would as soon be the author, as far as doing good is concerned, (the "Christian Year" for example,) as be the preacher and printer of sermons.

Mr. G. afterwards goes on to make very large demands on readers of sermons. They are to read with the same teachable disposition and the same respect for the minister, &c., as should be brought to the hearing of God's word. Truly, a critic's condition is a very lamentable one, if it is indeed a duty to read every volume of sermons with the same respect with which it is unquestionably even a critic's duty to hear. It is to be hoped that Mr. G. will consider this case in his next volume; and as he is somewhat expeditious, the race of critics will not suffer long in suspense. If Mr. G. makes out his

case against them, there appears to be but one refuge for them-viz., the wholly declining to read any sermons to be hereafter published, and contenting themselves with those which they already know that they can read with as much respect as they would hear. Farther than this Mr. G. cannot go. He can never shew that it is our duty to read fresh sermons any more than it is our duty to attend other ministers besides our parish priest.

Mr. G.'s other sermon has had some curious criticisms past on it. The Evangelical Magazine says it is such a sermon as never was preached before an University before! There is some difficulty in understanding this. One may, perhaps, say, without disparagement, that it is not quite the best sermon ever preached before an University. What can the Evangelical Magazine mean then?

An eminent and accomplished critic is understood to have described this sermon as one which was preached on Sunday and printed on Monday. And this really appears to be so just a description of it, that it is more kind to criticise it no further. Two remarks only shall be made—one, that Mr. G. does not shew the most entire charity in supposing, as he seems to do all through, that every one who opposes dissent, hates all dissenters; and the other, that if he has indeed known many persons who, to use his own words, “would take pains to hinder the success of dissenters preaching, and yet take no pains for the church to succeed instead," or many "who never so much as pray for the conversion of their brethren, and yet would forbid those who to their prayers for that end would add costly sacrifice," &c., &c., &c., (p. 9), he has been very unfortunate in his friends and acquaintances.

A Translation of Mede's Clavis Apocalyptica. By R. Bransby Cooper, Esq. London: Rivingtons. 1833. pp. 455.

A Commentary on the Revelation of St. John. By the same Author. London: Rivingtons. 1833. pp. 224.

THE first of these publications will be a very acceptable present to the English student of the Bible, as in having Mede's views set before him, he will certainly have those of the soundest writer on prophecy unfulfilled.

The second work is also valuable, as the Commentary is nearly founded upon Mede's views, and Mr. Cooper points out where he has gone beyond them. What caution is required in handling such a subject, when, as Mr. Cooper observes, even Mede interprets the same type at one time of our Lord and at another of Vespasian!

An Appeal to the Nobility and Gentry of the County of Leicester, on behalf of the Church of England. Dedicated by permission to the Duke of Rutland. By the Rev. F. Merewether, M.A.

THIS publication, though addressed to the "Nobility and Gentry of the County of Leicester," is, in fact, an appeal, substantially and virtually, to the whole of that class in England in behalf of the established church. Never was there a time when such an appeal could come with more fitness and expediency than the present; nor ever was there a time when it could more behove our "Nobility and Gentry" to give a serious and conscientious attention to such a matter. Mr. Merewether plainly exhibits to the "Nobility and Gentry" of this Christian land, how deeply they are personally and individually involved in the great question of promoting what we may call the popularity of the church of England. Her intrinsic and evangelical purity and truth may ever, by God's blessing, preserve her from entire discomfiture, however fiercely and bitterly she may be assailed. But the great mass of a population, and even a Christian population, will always be less moved by reflection than by outward influence and example. Let our higher

and more commanding ranks, therefore, who profess their attachment to our national church, consider what may with perfect justice be expected from them. They are not only to be ready to uphold her temporal respectability and consideration;-they must do more, if they would assist, as they ought, in recommending, by their own personal conduct, the church to the affections of the people around them; they must shew, by a conscientious and habitual obedience to the divine precepts and doctrines which she preaches, that they love, revere, and thoroughly believe her, as a pure and apostolical branch of Christ's church. They must not "lean too much on their own understanding," affecting to "teach" and "be wise," where they ought to submit to admonition and instruction. Nor should they exhibit that distant and ceremonious reserve towards their parish pastor, which seems to indicate that they rather bear with him as a public functionary, than esteem him worthy, by his profession, of their confidence and kindness, and by his education, of their respect and consideration. But Mr. Merewether has argued these matters with much good sense; and we could wish to see his publication in the hands of the influential classes in this country.

Essays on the Church, with some reference to Mr. James's Work, entitled "Dissent and the Church of England," reprinted, with additions from the "Christian Guardian." London: Seeley and Burnside. pp. 179.

THE first ten chapters of this work are most excellent, and deserve to be generally circulated. They contain one of the best and most readable views extant of the question as to the benefits of an establishment, with a quotation from Dr. Dwight, which should be reprinted in every form. It is much to be regretted that the author, who can argue so closely, and collect his facts so carefully, should have written, in his eleventh chapter, so crudely and inconsiderately about Church Reform, and given circulation to so many notorious falsehoods about the church. He says that Mr. A. Baring stated in Parliament that the See of London is worth 100,000l. per annum, and he goes on reasoning on the impropriety of a bishop having such an income, though he says that he does not know whether the statement was true. As a conscientious man, he ought to have known before he circulated this gross mis-statement, and he might have known. Where did he learn what Mr. B. said but from the debates? The same source would have taught him from authority that the See of London is under 14,000l. per annum. How does he excuse himself as a friend to the church for thus circulating a gross falsehood? Again, he says that nothing more has been done in the great parishes of London by "the timid and listless guardians of the church" (a very indecent, improper, and undeserved phrase), than the having three or four chapels of ease built, and that there is no parochial superintendence by clergy. Now every one will agree with him in wishing that more strength could be given to the church in this respect. But is it candid or Christian to make such charges without inquiry? Let him ask and blush at the answer which he will receive in St. James's, for example, and Marylebone. Let him be told that these great parishes (and the writer believes the same to be true of Pancras and St. George's) are divided regularly into districts by the whole clergy belonging to them, and carefully and faithfully visited and inspected, nay, that so full is the inspection achieved by these means, and that of well-organized committees and other aids and appliances, that, when the Committee of Health in one of the Marylebone parishes met last year, the clergy would have been able to give a good account of all the poor families inquired about but for the accidental absence of one of their body, and were able to do so of all except those in his district. Again, when he speaks of Bishops amassing large fortunes, and the consequent necessity of reducing bishoprics, there is an inconsiderateness truly surprising. The income of a bishopric may or may not be too large, but what has this to do with the VOL. III.-June, 1833.

4 S

« AnteriorContinuar »